Flavio v. James, GC 41.

[Flaviusx]

Northwest Front area: I do my usual checkerboard in depth. This should buy me a turn or two.

[Flaviusx]

Western Front: remnants do more checkerboarding between Minsk and the Dnepr, I begin to rail forces from the interior to lay down a defense line along the Smolensk landbridge. Another delaying action. Standard opening.

[Flaviusx]

James doesn't go for the Lvov pocket in the south. This makes my life easier. Personally, if I was playing German, I'd open with a strong south push every time. He'll still catch some of the boys from Lvov, but not as many.

In contrast to the the other two fronts, there are enough forces here to defend up front to some extent. I'm not too worried about saving the SW Front armor and am completely happy to put it front and let it get beat up on. They are just tank brigades in waiting. I do like to try to get the motorized away if possible.

One thing I try to do everywhere: put zocs on all Germans possible. Especially the mobile forces.

[ComradeP]

Good luck Flavio.

You're aware that the routed units in the checkerboard don't have a ZOC, right?

[Ketza]

He seems to been planning on them rallying. Thats a nice defence It would be a real challenge. Not a big fan of the German south start tho. Thtas a big mistake.

[Flaviusx]

Pieter, betting on a rally.

[ComradeP]

But they can only rally in your logistics phase. They'll still be routed in his phase, unless routed units get two chances to rally each turn, which would be odd.

[Flaviusx]

I know this, but we can no longer rail routed units. So I just have to place them as best I can.

I put them in areas where a German advance won't do too much harm.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Ketza

He seems to been planning on them rallying. Thats a nice defence It would be a real challenge. Not a big fan of the German south start tho. Thtas a big mistake.

What exactly do you think is a mistake?

[ComradeP]

I'd say: nothing is pocketed near Lvov and Tarnopol and nothing was isolated, which is a problem. Rovno also wasn't captured and the advance is rather narrow.

Splitting some divisions up into regiments is also a problem, due to the extra MP costs. If the regiments end up in multiple ZOC's, recombining is really costly in terms of MP's.

[Flaviusx]

I was a little surprised he didn't make a grab for Rovno, yeah. Indeed, I've got a nice buffer zone in front of it now. He'll munch on my tank divisions in the area, but unlike a lot of Soviet players I don't place any great value on these.

[Oleg Mastruko]

Flavio, Pieter, Ketza? Have you been watching fashion news updates last couple weeks? [:D] Tarnopol vector is all the rage in Axis AGS opening turns this winter season, and, having been on the receiving end on some Axis turns I can confirm is probably the best Axis can do. Much better than Rovno even though it may not be immediatelly obvious.

[Flaviusx]

The Tarnopol push all the way to the Romanian border is a great play...with the extra panzer corps thrown in to do it.

What I'm less convinced about is a push to Tarnopol that falls short of the Romanian border with AGS units only and at the same leaves Rovno alone. If you're gonna do Tarnopol, go all in like Q-ball does it.

Mynok tried something similar to this opening in the AGS thread in the war room forum. Which I think can be countered.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
Flavio, Pieter, Ketza? Have you been watching fashion news updates last couple weeks? [:D] Tarnopol vector is all the rage in Axis AGS opening turns this winter season, and, having been on the receiving end on some Axis turns I can confirm is probably the best Axis can do. Much better than Rovno even though it may not be immediatelly obvious.

There's a very nice rail line connecting Lvov - Tarnopol - Proskurov - Vinnitsa. A strong push along that axis splits into two groups the Soviet forces in the Ukraine. The fact that he will have strong Soviet forces on one of his flanks is not an issue at all, he can parry any counterattacks with infantry.

Securing that rail line also allows Axis players a great deal of flexibility: once he gets to Vinnitsa he can strike NE towards Kiev, E towards Cherkassy or SE to the Black Sea.

[ComradeP]

Either go all the way to the border, like I and others did, or try a more conservative pocket, but this "no pocket" opening is rather weak. It's weak because no units are isolated and thus nothing will surrender on turn 2, and because he'll get to the Romanian border on turn two now which is the same as with a Lvov or Tarnopol pocket. Yes, he did cut the rail line, but that can be done with limited forces and a Lvov/Kovel pocket. As many units can still move to the Proskurov area, there's a chance he'll rout some divisions out of the pocket he's trying to create.

Flavio, did you make any successful attacks?

[Flaviusx]

No attacks. I almost never attack on turn 1. The mobility just isn't there, Soviet MPs are crippled by the surprise attack.

Turn 2...that's when I start looking to do stuff.

[ComradeP]

I've made 4 thus far, two of which were successful. One on a Panzer division regiment and one against a security division with forces west of Lvov. The guys near Lvov are doomed anyway, might as well attack with them. An attack against another security division and another Panzer division regiment failed.

I'm seriously considering moving/railing Tank and motorized divisions to the rear and setting them to static. If they surrender or shatter, you can lose over 1000 vehicles per division. That's just not worth it. A bigger motorpool will allow for more mobile forces later on.

[kirkgregerson]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

I've made 4 thus far, two of which were successful. One on a Panzer division regiment and one against a security division with forces west of Lvov. The guys near Lvov are doomed anyway, might as well attack with them. An attack against another security division and another Panzer division regiment failed.

I seriously considering moving/railing Tank and motorized divisions to the rear and setting them to static. If they surrender or shatter, you can lose over 1000 vehicles per division. That's just not worth it. A bigger motorpool will allow for more mobile forces later on.

Lose 1000 vehicle from motor pool? I thought these mobile units had more intrinsic vehicles and thus did not effect your motor pool?

[ComradeP]

Those intrinsic vehicles are still a part of the total, which is motor pool+vehicles in units, so if you lose them in the units, they can no longer be in the motor pool. If you set the units to static or if they require less vehicles after a TOE change, the vehicles are returned to the pool and you can use them again.

I'm mostly looking at vehicle totals, not just the motor pool. There's little reason to waste 1000 vehicles by allowing a division to be pocketed. For every near full strength Tank or motorized division you lose, you lose vehicles that could fill about 20 Rifle divisions.

Vehicle production plummets after 1941 and the impact of Lend-Lease takes a while to be felt, so the mobile units you save in 1941 will indirectly allow your mid and late war offensives to be stronger because you have the vehicles for more mobile units than if you would not save the units in 1941.

[Flaviusx]

I've never felt I needed those trucks from tank divisions for the mobile forces I build later on. Going static with motorized units is enough and far more efficient from an AP standpoint. Rooting all your tank divisions on top of that for some theoretical truck advantage 2 years away is getting into Rube Goldberg territory.